[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150127175951.GA6886@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 09:59:51 -0800
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@...cle.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net>,
Maxim Patlasov <mpatlasov@...allels.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:AIO" <linux-aio@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] aio: add aio_kernel_() interface
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 12:18:23AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > Why do we keep these two separate? Especially having the iov passed
>
> No special meaning, just follow previous patches, :-)
>
> But one benefit is that we can separate the one-shot
> initialization from submit, at least filep/complete/ki_ctx can be
> set during initialization.
FYI, I've posted another approach at async kernel reads/writes in the
"[RFC] split struct kiocb" series. I thought I had you on Cc, but I
messed it up.
This keeps the separate init function, but it still feels a bit
pointless to me.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists